Parshah through the Mediator’s Lens: Shemini

As a Jewish legal mediator, I often turn to tradition not only for inspiration but also for wisdom in resolving disputes. This week’s Torah portion, Shemini, is especially powerful, yet unsettling at the same time. It contains a moment of profound conflict that speaks volumes to the challenges we face in mediation: when grief, law, leadership, and human emotion collide.

The Conflict in Shemini

In Shemini (Leviticus 9:1 – 11:47), the joy of the Tabernacle’s inauguration is shattered by tragedy. Aaron’s sons, Nadav and Avihu, bring a “strange fire” before G-d, which G-d had not commanded. In response, a divine fire consumes them.

What follows is a scene of emotional and procedural tension. Moses speaks to Aaron, suggesting that this was G-d’s way of sanctifying G-d’s name. Aaron responds with silence and his remaining sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, do not eat the sin offering as prescribed by G-d. Moses is angry. But Aaron, still upset from his loss, explains that given the day’s tragic events, it would not have been appropriate for them to eat the offering.

Moses listens. And then, we read: “Moses listened, and it was good in his eyes” (Leviticus 10:20). This is one of the rare moments in Torah where Moses is corrected and he accepts the correction graciously. This is even more powerful in a modern concept as how many of us possess the humility to admit we were wrong, especially to one’s family?

Was the Conflict Resolved?

In one sense, yes: the dispute about whether the sin offering should have been eaten is resolved not by rigid insistence on law, but by empathy and contextual judgment. Moses listens not only to the letter of the law but to the spirit of what Aaron is saying. Aaron, in turn, responds respectfully, giving voice to the human cost of what has occurred.

But in another sense, the deeper conflict involving the pain of divine punishment and tension between law and grief remains unresolved. Aaron’s silence speaks volumes. Some things, even in law, cannot be fully resolved. They can only be held with compassion and humility.

Modern Mediation Lessons

From this story, several powerful mediation lessons emerge:

1. Listening with Compassion: Moses’s transformation from anger to acceptance teaches us the importance of active listening.  We cannot just hear words, we must be open to the emotional truths behind them. Mediators must hold space for grief, frustration, and complexity.
2. Flexibility in Process: Aaron’s explanation doesn’t follow strict halakhic procedure, yet Moses acknowledges its validity. As mediators, we often find that rigid adherence to process must give way to human context. Resolution isn’t always about who is “right”. It’s about what is just in the given moment.
3. Silence as Communication: Aaron’s silence is not weakness; it is powerful restraint. In mediation, silence can signal emotional depth, reflection, or even resistance. As a mediator, I have learned to read silence not as absence, but as presence. Although, to be honest, knowing when to be silent is one of the most difficult strategies to accomplish.
4. The Role of Authority: Moses, the supreme leader, allows himself to be corrected. This models the humility essential in conflict resolution. Mediators too must balance authority with humility, showing parties that it’s safe to voice dissent.
5. Embracing the Unresolvable: Not all conflicts can be fixed. Some must simply be acknowledged, held, and honored. Recognizing this helps us guide parties to more realistic understandings, even if the pain remains.

Final Thoughts

Shemini teaches us that even in the holiest spaces, conflict arises. There is still room for honest dialogue, empathy, and growth. As a mediator, I am called to help others find peace not by denying pain, but by walking through it with integrity and compassion.

Shabbat Shalom.

___________

Each week, Ari Sliffman, a Jewish legal mediator in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania will discuss the week’s Parshah “through the lens of a mediator.”  Ari will focus on one or two sections of the Parshah and discuss how a mediator could have assisted with the relevant conflict.